Читать книгу Tourism Enterprise - David Leslie - Страница 9

The extensive methodology formulated was designed primarily to investigate serviced accommodation (Leslie, 2001b). This, the initial and most substantive stage, was then expanded to encompass other categories of tourism enterprise, namely inns, restaurants, caravan and camping sites, attractions and given their increasing presence in tourism supply, self-catering operations were also brought into consideration. The latter have almost totally been ignored in myriad policies and initiatives aimed at promoting the ‘greening’ of tourism. This is perhaps surprising given the substantial growth in supply since the 1980s and today is substantially understated (Leslie, 2007a). Given that enterprises in the LDNP might be subject to factors particular to being in the Park, e.g. National Park Authority’s regulations on planning and development, a sample of similar enterprises (serviced-accommodation, inns and attractions – 47 in total) located outside of the LDNP but within Cumbria was also researched by way of establishing a comparative sample (the Fringe study). A key theme of CSR and thus in the research was the question of support for local produce and products. To further this area of enquiry, a sample of local food producers and cafes, were approached who, with very few exceptions, were very willing to participate and were particularly helpful in responding to the enquiries. A number of ‘arts & crafts’ producers and retail outlets were also investigated given their presence and visitor spending patterns.

The expansive set of indicators established for the study were derived specifically for hotels in the first instance in order to ensure comprehensive and detailed coverage of all aspects of an hotel’s operations pertinent to its environmental performance. As such, it was recognized that the scope enquiry could be adjusted as necessary for any other category of tourism supply (excluding tour operators and travel agents) operating in a destination. These indicators were established through a diverse range of sources and set out in the following categories: business profile of the enterprise; staffing (including where from), training and development, recruitment, involvement in greening; perceptions and attitudes of the owners/managers; resource management and operations; purchasing, suppliers, local produce; guests and communications; factors discouraging progress and in the case of the audits profiles of the owner or manager of the enterprise. This was then translated first to formulate a broad, investigative general questionnaire designed for postal distribution, and then into a far more extensive and detailed format to serve as the basis for extended, personal interviews (akin to household surveys) involving a subset of those surveyed through the initial questionnaire.

The choice of indicators used has since been reflected in other studies (for example, Ceron and Dubois, 2003; Carter et al., 2004; Mensah, 2009; Kucerova, 2012). Thus the appropriateness and quality of these indicators in terms of ‘fit for purpose’ is rather affirmed, which is especially important given that these same indicators were used in later research. This is not to suggest they are perfect but rather well-suited to the task, as Blackstock et al. (2008) noted, indicators tend to address what is desired. It is recognized that this is very much subject to the vested interests of the researcher or commissioning agent, which throughout this study was of no influential significance. Care was also exercised in communications throughout to avoid the terms ‘sustainable development’ and ‘sustainability’ as potentially this would lead to some degree of confusion over how such terms were interpreted by those involved in the study and, for example, create variability within the data itself. This was also why a focus group drawing on representatives of the sector was not initiated to establish the necessary criteria as potentially this would have also led to little more than fairly standard gross tourism data; as McCool et al. (2001) found in their study. The key point is the need to recognize and understand that in any one group of stakeholders there will be a mix of understanding of the agenda and to echo Blackstock et al., what is desired.

To potentially obtain a substantial sample of serviced-accommodation operations, it was decided that first a survey using the general questionnaire would be implemented by mail. By reference to a range of sources such as accommodation guides and promotional literature and business telephone lists a database of 853 serviced accommodation operations was established. The choice of enterprises was not based on any prior criteria other than the availability of accommodation. After the initial pilot stage and refinement of the questionnaire, the survey was then implemented by mail to all the listed enterprises along with a covering letter and to enhance the return rate, the offer of being entered into a free prize draw. On the basis that the study was about greening, thus in keeping with this theme, suitable paper and envelopes were reused as and when appropriate, throughout the research. This questionnaire was then tailored to meet the different and specific aspects of each of the other categories of tourism enterprise (349 in total) and implemented using the same process as for serviced accommodation. The survey into the self-catering operations (120) required the development of a different questionnaire. This process was then repeated for serviced accommodation, inns and attractions in the ‘fringe area’ (total 320), overall gaining a response of 336 from the LDNP and 47 for the fringe area. As previously noted, food producers and arts and/or craft producers were also surveyed, again using a similar method, though with a specifically designed questionnaire for the locally based food producers and also for the craft person’s elements of the study. Additional research into arts and crafts involving direct personal interviews of the managers/owners of retail outlets (42 outlets) to investigate the range of arts and craft products sold and their views on stocking local products was undertaken.

The initial survey into the environmental performance of serviced accommodation included an invitation to take part in more detailed investigations to explore in depth the approach and practices of owners/managers of these tourism enterprises, which gained 52 positive responses. These took the form of personal interviews, in effect extended environmental audits (the forms for these interviews consisting of 24 pages). Further enquiries involving additional research were also undertaken during the extensive field work to investigate matters arising from the surveys and the interviews. Following on from this study, research into the environmental performance of enterprises in rural Scotland was undertaken utilizing the same methodology, with minor adjustments of the survey vehicle to allow for geographic variances, but with no follow-up interviews. A database of 1000 enterprises was established and questionnaires specific to the category of enterprises were then mailed gaining a response of 363; similar in make up to that of the LDNP study. The category with the lowest response rate was that of the larger hotels, which might be indicative that hotel managers were less interested in the study. The location of these enterprises in Scotland has added value given the Scottish Government’s proclaimed policies on seeking to be the ecotourism destination within the EU (Leslie, 2010) and more widely their proclaimed objective of being the leader in the field of green initiatives, promoting the sustainability of the landscape and biodiversity (Leslie, 2013). Scotland is also where the Green Tourism Business Scheme (GTBS) was launched in the late 1990s and since promoted throughout the UK and potentially in other European countries (Leslie, 2011).

The lack of resources to undertake the audit interviews was disappointing. However an opportunity did arise a little later and thus a third stage to the overall study was initiated. This third stage involved a majority of urban enterprises and included a number of comparatively larger enterprises and as per the LDNP audits only involved serviced accommodation. Following established practice the preliminary survey was undertaken and then the owners/managers were invited to participate in the more in-depth audit and personal interviews stage (78 enterprises). It should be noted that there is a potentially significant difference between this sample and that of the LDNP in that the enterprises were each invited to participate in the audit stage but they were also encouraged to do so by asking each one personally if they would support the project as this would be beneficial to the student interviewers as part of their final year studies in Tourism Management. It is logical therefore that the urban sample is less subject to the possibility of bias towards the promotion of greening than their counterparts in the LDNP group, who volunteered. The focus in this stage on urban tourism enterprises is particularly notable given that they have received even less attention in terms of their environmental performance and similarly in the context of ‘sustainable tourism’ than their rural counterparts (Hinch, 1996). Whilst Hinch’s analysis is dated to nearly 20 years ago, there is little evidence since to change such perception. But then it is far easier for policymakers to consider tourism in rural settings when it comes to advocating greening, where tourism supply may well dominate whilst the same cannot be said for urban, especially city, localities, wherein questions might well be raised by the owners as to why tourism enterprises are apparently being singled out to address their environmental management practices! In total, this research amounts in effect to a longitudinal study into the greening of tourism enterprises that commenced in the 1990s and concluded in terms of empirical research in 2012. For clarity and reference, the sample sets for the three stages are presented in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1. Categorization of survey returns.

The implementation of predominantly the same methodology, including only slightly modified questionnaires, e.g. VisitScotland or Area Tourist Board instead of Cumbria Tourist Board, means that these four data sets are directly comparable. Various areas encompassed within this research were found to be evident in similar studies and this contributes further to opportunities for comparison and the robustness of the study. Certainly there are some differences between the data sets. The first to note is the different time frames. It is argued this is of little significance between the 2006 set and that of 2001 though during this period utility costs increased, the infrastructure for recycling improved and the period witnessed further attention to promoting EMS practices and, more widely, CSR. These factors are equally pertinent to the 2011 data set. However, a further factor is that the empirical research was undertaken in the wake of the 2007–8 financial/economic crisis. This may well have influenced some of the data, especially any indicators that involved costs and also possibly the attitudes of the owners/managers to such matters. The possibility of such influences is considered, as and where appropriate, in the analysis of the data, which is presented in the following sequence of chapters. Findings from the studies into local food producers and arts and crafts, as and where appropriate, are included in these chapters.